Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

If you mean robbers giving dogs sleeping drugs, then they would first have to get inside my house to feed them to my dog, since he sleeps inside.
Usually my dog hears most things that go on outside, as I live in a town where almost no cars are, heck there is even a castle with the Count living in my street, why would the robber even bother looting my house if there is a freaking castle down the road.

I'm sure many of the people who say "I would scream and deliver him to the police!!! Or grab my .357 and SHOOT HIM IN THE FACE!!! I AM AN HERO, WHOOOOOOOOOOOO!" haven't ever been in such a situation before.

Things happen too fast, too violently and too rashly. Before you've even managed to realize what the hell happened, you'll be acting based on pure instinct. That is, unless you have some real zen-like self-control abilities.

I've been effectively mugged once, and have been subject to a potential robbery at least three times (one time it happened when I was 9). All of those I did the only thing that occurred to me at the moment: Run away like hell. If you've never experienced such a borderline situation your brain is put into, then it's really hard to tell what you're going to do when the moment comes.

Am I a coward? I don't know. And I frankly don't care. At least I'm sitting here, now, writing this. And whatever I lost that one time they managed to mug me (a cellphone and a couple of bucks), believe me, is of no consequence at all. Money comes and goes. Your life doesn't.

__________________

Place them in a box until a quieter time | Lights down, you up and die.

I'm sure many of the people who say "I would scream and deliver him to the police!!! Or grab my .357 and SHOOT HIM IN THE FACE!!! I AM AN HERO, WHOOOOOOOOOOOO!" haven't ever been in such a situation before.

Things happen too fast, too violently and too rashly. Before you've even managed to realize what the hell happened, you'll be acting based on pure instinct. That is, unless you have some real zen-like self-control abilities.

I'd have to agree with this.

Frankly, most robbers (the professional ones) are well prepared when they try to loot a house. It's probably a house they observed for a week before they struck. And when they go in, it's them that's prepared and not the persons living in the house. I don't know about robbers in other part of the world, but here in the country where I live, most house burglars are like that - well prepared.

That's why my first instinct would be life preservation instead of trying to defend the house. I have my bed strategically positioned in my bedroom so that I can shove it easily in front of the door and the other end of the bed would be up against a wall. That way, even if they manage to break the locks, they still won't be able to get into my room. Unless they burn my house down, I'd still be safe and waiting for help to arrive.

If you mean robbers giving dogs sleeping drugs, then they would first have to get inside my house to feed them to my dog, since he sleeps inside.

I remember seeing some television program about a professional thief. He didn't actually steal things, but he tested people's home security for them - think of it as security audiiting. The segment I viewed dealt with dogs. The guy said that it's a myth that dogs are good protection - simply go to the fridge and pull out some food for them, and they'll quickly quiet down and perhaps even come to trust you. He did remark that small, yappy dogs were the worst. They present no physical threat, but they are much, much harder to quiet.

Quote:

Usually my dog hears most things that go on outside, as I live in a town where almost no cars are, heck there is even a castle with the Count living in my street, why would the robber even bother looting my house if there is a freaking castle down the road.

He'd loot your house precisely because you'd expect him to go for the castle. It's kind of like how Mac OS X users are probably going to be screwed in the near future: Windows (the castle) has a reputation for being under constant attack, and everyone else (Linux & Mac - the houses around the castle) figures that since Windows is the target, they're perfectly safe. The others are perfectly viable targets, and arguably they're even better targets because they'd never see it coming.

I'm sure many of the people who say "I would scream and deliver him to the police!!! Or grab my .357 and SHOOT HIM IN THE FACE!!! I AM AN HERO, WHOOOOOOOOOOOO!" haven't ever been in such a situation before.

Trial by fire and learning from mistakes

I can't say much about being robbed since that hasn't happened with me, but I can sure as hell tell you how to react to an assault since I've been through that (Even though things didn't good for me, I'd know what to do know)...I can be safe to say that if I've been assaulted, I can assume what it's like to be robbed by merely thinking about having my possessions taken from me after the assault...

Of course those that think about playing the hero role in such situations don't think in realistic terms...Read any gun magazine like NRA's American Rifleman, and when people like law enforcement officers write articles that teach you proper self-defense techniques, they want you first and foremost to think tactical and smart, and not gung-ho "YEAH, FUCK 'EM UP", since the latter mindset can kill you more than it can save you...

Oh, and the thing with dogs is that they probably don't offer protection as much as they provide an alert...Unless you own a large and rabid pit bull that doesn't know the damn difference between a trespasser and it's owner, a dog's barking makes for a good effect in letting you know that there are some unwanted guests in the house (Granted you don't have the kind of dog that will bark at random because they hear noises in their head when they chew hard food >_< )...

__________________

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz

I'm sure many of the people who say "I would scream and deliver him to the police!!! Or grab my .357 and SHOOT HIM IN THE FACE!!! I AM AN HERO, WHOOOOOOOOOOOO!" haven't ever been in such a situation before.

uhm regards to this isnt you will be charged with assualt?
because if im not mistaken.. you cannot fire a direct point to the
criminal unless your been threatened?

and there is also a possiblity of charging you with murder as well?

(well thats my view point and what i learned in constitution..)

[back to topic]
i havent been robbed before but supposedly that if been robbed its better that
you let the criminal take your stuff, rather than fight it?

because i figured, what if i fight and suddenly he stabs me a butcher knife (like you'd see in "Jason" movies?) or shot me in the chest with a pistol?
and besides life is more important than your stuff is the way i figured..

anyway i'd just knock on wood that i wont be in that situation for the time being..

I've seen some interesting posts.. I have a good sturdy door and my windows are always locked. If entry is still forced, I have my Glock 22 (.40) loaded with Glassers rounds so they don't over penetrate, i.e. go through the guy/wall into my neighbors. I also have night sights on the gun to get a site target in low light. I hope I never need to do this.

I don't think you would have to worry about overpenetration with most pistol rounds, granted that pistol rounds can still cause through-and-throughs, but they lose most of their muzzle velocity after exit (Since they already have a low muzzle velocity), and might even shatter depending where on the body they hit...Let's also hope you never have to fire at someone at a very close range contact if you worry about overpenetration...

Now...If you had something like an FN Five-seveN with the more rifle-like 5.7x28mm cartridge that's designed to effective against modern body armor, then yeah, you'll have to worry about overpenetration there..

Actually, if anything, a bigger pistol caliber would probably be even better, because of stopping power, to keep the person from trying to continue charging at you after being shot, like with a .40 S&W or a .45 ACP round...

__________________

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz

Actually, if anything, a bigger pistol caliber would probably be even better, because of stopping power, to keep the person from trying to continue charging at you after being shot, like with a .40 S&W or a .45 ACP round...

I'm no ballistics expert, but I think this myth about "bigger bullet equals more stopping power" needs to be addressed. No round — regardless of its calibre — is going to do you any good if it doesn't hit the target. Meaning to say, if you don't look where (and at what) you're shooting, you'd be probably a lot safer without a firearm in your hands.

I found this particular observation fairly entertaining, and enlightening, when I first came across it a year ago.

Quote:

Stopping power studies are unreliable when compared to laboratory results. This is no surprise — the conclusions are based on flawed data.

Among the most inane comments ever to see print, and one that did armed individuals great injustice, was a pat pronouncement on shot placement. This individual told us that load selection is more important than shot placement! The point was that we cannot control shot placement but we can control load selection, and a good hot load might serve even if not well delivered.

Anyone who has shot game knows better than that. This is even more true in self defence. Accuracy can make up for power. The reverse is seldom true. The bullet must be delivered to the right place, and that is a blood-bearing organ. Only loss of blood and actual damage can be counted upon. A bullet that makes a peripheral hit simply cannot be counted on, whatever the calibre.

When we study what happens during gunfights, we should study the tactical information first and bullet performance second. When we compare the power available in handgun bullets to that of long guns such as the 12-gauge shotgun or the .223 rifle, we find that the "weak .38" and the "strong .45" are more alike than they differ!

That said, the writer did profess his preference for big bullets if given the choice:

Quote:

Over time, the inescapable conclusion is that the key to handgun stopping power is marksmanship. But big-bore handguns make bigger holes and let out more air. This makes for more rapid blood loss, the only mechanism that can be counted on to do the business.

The 9mm isn't ok. You can ask the fellow who took four 9mm soft-point bullets and still managed to inflict a nasty wound that remains with me to this day, and gives my face "character".

Frankly, I find the American love affair with firearms very scary, but I accept that it's a stereotype that isn't true for most people in the United States. I've also accepted their need for personal weapons, especially if they live in isolated areas far from police protection. But still, if you do carry a firearm, for goodness sake, please make sure you get proper training. And make sure you keep practising too. When you're under stress, the training will — hopefully — kick in when your brain fails to work.

I'm no ballistics expert, but I think this myth about "bigger bullet equals more stopping power" needs to be addressed. No round — regardless of its calibre — is going to do you any good if it doesn't hit the target. Meaning to say, if you don't look where (and at what) you're shooting, you'd be probably a lot safer without a firearm in your hands.

I found this particular observation fairly entertaining, and enlightening, when I first came across it a year ago.

That said, the writer did profess his preference for big bullets if given the choice:

I had to chime in simply to affirm these truths.

A bigger hole is always better, but a small hole is preferable to no hole or a big hole in the wrong place.

I'll take my little 9x18mm antique pistol over a .44 magnum revolver any day of the week, simply because I shoot so much better with it. Fortunately, my next pistol, a 1911A1, won't require much compromise either way since the ergonomics of the pistol allow me to shoot a .45 from it as well as I can shoot any smaller caliber.

Any one who chooses a firearm for its large caliber without consideration of their ability to fire it proficiently needs to reevaluate their decision and their life-view in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Frankly, I find the American love affair with firearms very scary, but I accept that it's a stereotype that isn't true for most people in the United States. I've also accepted their need for personal weapons, especially if they live in isolated areas far from police protection. But still, if you do carry a firearm, for goodness sake, please make sure you get proper training. And make sure you keep practising too. When you're under stress, the training will — hopefully — kick in when your brain fails to work.

Although we've discussed such issues a bit before, it occurs to me that I probably don't know quite how you see the American stereotype regarding firearms. Since I see you as being a pretty level-headed person and a good critical thinker, I am curious to know just what your view of it is, and how you pick it up.

Just to share my perspective:
While some people are frighteningly obsessed with what they see as symbols of power (or, for many of the more urban, are frightened by what they see as symbols of power), in my experience, most American firearms owners don't have that emotional idea of firearms, and appreciate them simply as machines and tools. The more typical American cultural feelings attached to firearms have more to do with the enhanced independence and security they've allowed for individuals and families in the wide, lesser inhabited parts of the US (especially as the western parts of the nation were settled), and the independence and security that the individual right to bear arms has provided in the past--made all the more poignant in the last century after several examples of seeing other peoples disarmed and then murdered by authorities, whether they be the native authorities or invaders.

In light of those, having the right to bear arms, both as a freedom in general and as a symbol of a constitution of a free state, is much celebrated. I do consider it very unfortunate, though, that the US government has failed in its responsibility to train its militia (a responsibility implied by that same constitutional amendment, but no longer met).

You are absolutely right regarding training. While I often argue that the necessary training for firearm proficiency is quite easy to satisfy, I do believe it is of great importance. Continued practice is also important, although I admit I am neglectful of that at the moment. Unfortunately, where I live now I am not able to simply walk into the back yard to practice as I could at home, and ammunition is expensive (and, for my caliber, very hard to find). That's little excuse, though. I think it's time to schedule some time at the range.

I don't think you would have to worry about overpenetration with most pistol rounds, granted that pistol rounds can still cause through-and-throughs, but they lose most of their muzzle velocity after exit (Since they already have a low muzzle velocity), and might even shatter depending where on the body they hit...Let's also hope you never have to fire at someone at a very close range contact if you worry about overpenetration...

Now...If you had something like an FN Five-seveN with the more rifle-like 5.7x28mm cartridge that's designed to effective against modern body armor, then yeah, you'll have to worry about overpenetration there..

Actually, if anything, a bigger pistol caliber would probably be even better, because of stopping power, to keep the person from trying to continue charging at you after being shot, like with a .40 S&W or a .45 ACP round...

Funny you mention the Five Seven, that's going to be my next gun. Long range pistol O f course with the civilian rounds, you don't get the armor piercers

Although we've discussed such issues a bit before, it occurs to me that I probably don't know quite how you see the American stereotype regarding firearms...I am curious to know just what your view of it is, and how you pick it up.

Where else but from the font of wisdom that is Hollwood?

Jokes aside, recurring stories about school shootings and various other anecdotes about accidental deaths related to firearms tend to colour my perception of America's gun culture. Sometimes, it's not just the incident itself that is alarming, but also the kinds of comments that such tragedies throw up — the pervasive idea that the only way to solve gun crimes is to carry an even bigger gun. I fail to see the logic. How does encouraging a civilian arms race help to remove guns from the wrong hands?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

Most American firearms owners don't have that emotional idea of firearms, and appreciate them simply as machines and tools.

That's what I find alarming. Firearms aren't your average gardening or carpentry tools. They are machines designed for one primary purpose: To kill. That's a lot of responsibility to carry in one's hands. If an individual is not prepared to train properly for that responsibility, then he would do himself a favour by not buying a gun. He'd be tempting an ugly fate otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

The right to bear arms, both as a freedom in general and as a symbol of a constitution of a free state, is much celebrated.

Speaking as an outsider, I find many more freedoms in the United States worth celebrating other than its citizens' right to bear arms. I look forward to the biggest trip of my life next month, when I visit the country again for the first time in over 20 years. Knowing me, I'd probably bust a few stereotypes while discovering several more.

Last edited by TinyRedLeaf; 2008-09-15 at 14:44.
Reason: Changed the misleading use of second-person pronouns. I wanted to refer to the general "you".

I had someone try to break into my house before. Asshole tried to get in through the side door...He'd already broken the door and was on his way in when I did a flying kick from the other side of the door, basically plantin the door on his face haha. Sure scared the shit out of the guy and made him run away. Talked to the cops afterwards about what would have happened if I beat the crap out of the guy with a bat, and the cop told me the thief could press charges...WTF!

Any one who chooses a firearm for its large caliber without consideration of their ability to fire it proficiently needs to reevaluate their decision and their life-view in general.

Caliber handling also has to do with strength and practicality...I single out the .40 S&W and .45 ACP because they're both manageable and practical, since a well-trained shooter can control the recoil and group close shots together pretty easily, and they're just enough for self-defense/offense against an intruder at their most...That wouldn't be the case so much with, say, a .357/.44 Magnum, or (To those that play too much CS or watched "The Matrix" too much) a .50 AE, lest you have problems with elephants and bears breaking into your house, but I don't think that'll be the case in most of America...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Speaking as an outsider, I find many more freedoms in the United States worth celebrating other than its citizens' right to bear arms.

It has to do with history; We wouldn't have our other freedoms if Colonial American citizens didn't band up into a militia and successfully revolt against the British Empire, so the right to bear arms goes hand-in-hand with many of our other rights, and there's a reason why it's the 2nd Constitutional right, after the freedom of speech 1st Amendment clause...

__________________

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz

It has to do with history; We wouldn't have our other freedoms if Colonial American citizens didn't band up into a militia and successfully revolt against the British Empire, so the right to bear arms goes hand-in-hand with many of our other rights

We also revolted against the Spaniards and, in general terms, we're not half the gunnuts America projects its image of.

Of course, we have our own set of cultural issues (mostly originated from the fact it was Spain and not England the one colonizing us).

__________________

Place them in a box until a quieter time | Lights down, you up and die.

In my country the crimes are usually done by the african people 90% of the time. So these days what I do is just avoid the ones that look like criminals and that should do the job of avoiding danger or the risk of getting robbed etc.

I hate when it they try to alienate people like that. They're also from your own damn country, for chrissake.

Did you ask them and they replies that they were trying to alientate them ? It's better they say it than they not say it because now everyone knows who to stay away from. In fact they are helping out the African people from African people. How can you alienate and help something at the same time ? It just doesn't make sense does it. And also this is statistics.

In my country the crimes are usually done by the african people 90% of the time. So these days what I do is just avoid the ones that look like criminals and that should do the job of avoiding danger or the risk of getting robbed etc.